Opinion

Conversations On The Impacts Of Private Universities On Public Universities In Africa (2)

Published

3 years ago

January 12, 2022

NewTimes

Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon

By Toyin Falola

Of all the superstructures that hold the evolution and development of a society, the education sector accounts for a wholesome characterisation of civilisations and cultures. This was the basis of the conference convened by the University of Texas at Austin, funded by the Carnegie Corporation. The overall goal is to redefine the academic culture in Africa.

With a constellation of scholars—the very best of them in their various fields—from five African countries converging on the main campus of the Babcock University, Ilishan-Remo, Ogun State, to discuss or rather, debate issues revolving around the resuscitation of this sector, no talisman is required to project how dire the condition of this sector is in Africa. Given the robust debates and depth of analyses that followed the opening of the “August” conference, it would not be wrong to assume that the two-day event could have as well ended after the first day.

If there were to be any form of linkages and cooperation between the academic/intelligentsia community, the states, and industries in Africa, this conference provided one of the ready avenues for the states to begin a rethink of the purpose of education in the continent. Also, if the various messages of the conference were to be properly harnessed, it would fall back to the issue of the relationship between the town and the gown. As one of the participants asked, what are the national interests of these states and the direction of their educational systems and structures? Or, to put it differently, what are the ground norms governing the existence and proliferation of these institutions? These were the frames of thought that agitated the minds of seasoned scholars and administrators with great passion at the conference, which began at the convener’s lodge even before the official opening of the event.

In his opening lecture, Professor Oluwatoyin Ogundipe, the amiable Vice-Chancellor of the University of Lagos, implicitly took this discussion further to several cogent issues, ironing out the many contours that prevail on this important question. From quality assurance, the synergy between private and public universities, impact of both institutions on each other and the society, funding and administration of both institutions, possible ways of improvement, and a variety of other issues, the professor of botany brought together and shared his seasoned experience with the audience. Subsequent panels built on this discussion with insightful inputs and peculiarities from different countries and experiences.

From a gathering that brought together the likes of Professors Jibrin Ibrahim, Dele Ashiru, Jimi Agbaje, Femi Mimiko, Abdul Rasheed Na’Allah, Sati Fwatshak, Biodun Ogunyemi, Ayo Olukotun, Jide Owoeye and countless of others who have doubled in the academic matrix as scholars and administrators, one cannot expect less than an insightful and intellectually stimulating session. The contributions of these scholars made it clear that even though funding is a recurrent albatross on the university system in Africa, the available capacity of these institutions has not been closely adapted and utilised for optimum performance within the academic community or the general public. This goes further into the area of autonomy, where they reiterated the basic value of this existential threat to the sector’s development. By autonomy, they brought to the fore the composition of these universities’ councils, the apportionment of staff and principal officers, admission of students, programs design, and the general administration of the institutions. The position remains that if the university system in the continent is left to the realm of politicisation and mediocrity, it will remain an industrial reproduction and recycling of a rotten system.

It is hard to pinpoint the most important aspect of the discussion of the day in a short piece like this because the entire event comprises stimulating ideas, proposals, and models. Nonetheless, the debate about the role of ASUU in the university system in Nigeria deserves adumbrating. As the nucleus of the system in the country, the body is not new to controversies, and, at the same time, it is not without its many challenges. The conference brought this to light as the audience became better informed and were reminded of its relevance and impact on the system. One of the interesting panels on the second day of the event was on unionism in the system. Professor Owoeye of Lead City University, Ibadan, made a remarkable parallel between this body and university proprietors in the private universities, a compelling point that cannot be ignored but is rarely considered.

In this light, ASUU is described as the soul of the university system in Nigeria, without which its detractors would have taken the role of undertakers, burying the academic community in the abyss of the anti-intellectual inclination and paradigm of the state. The successes of the body in areas of improving the quality of education and research in the state and holding government accountable to its responsibility, particularly as noted in Section 18(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, were highlighted in the areas of TETFund, Need-for-Assessment and other deliverables that have characterised the activities of the body since its inception. Without doubting the importance of this body to the university system and the education sector generally in the country, participants also hoped that its operational model could be reviewed for more pragmatic engagement with the state, other bodies in the university system and the university authorities to achieve optimum performance.

According to Professor Sati Fwashak, the question of whether private universities are relevant to the education terrain of African states should not even be contemplated; rather, the focus should be on how to make them better to turn the tide of what he referred to as “compromised access and inaccessible access.” This was what drew Professor Mimiko into the discussion, as he relates it to the operational model of these institutions to attract the best in the society in terms of staffing and student composition. In addition, various speakers from the opening lecture given by Professor Ogundipe suggested how this could be achieved, focusing on broadening the spectrum of their partnership with public universities. Students and staff exchange, joint committees, scholarships, collaborative research, and other areas that border on global best practices were emphasised in these dynamics.

Following this were country reports from Kenya, Ghana, South Africa, and Nigeria in which Professors Sati Fwashak (Nigeria), Samuel Oloruntoba (South Africa), Peter Wekesa (Kenya) and Abeku Blankson (Ghana), providing the audience with relevant statistics and practices from the assessment of the education climate in their various countries. The issues are more or less the same, and the challenges reflect one another. This implies that there are many areas in which these countries could learn from one another to develop what could be referred to as the education/knowledge industry if taken together from the position of the participants. Referring to the education/knowledge industry alludes to a model of administration that is business-inclined and which encompasses resource management, resource development, capacity building, flexibility, goal setting and purpose-driven dynamics. Even though a lot needs to be done in these areas in the private universities, participants believed that public universities would have to learn this model from them to survive the anachronistic landscape that drives the anti-intellectual culture of states in Africa.

With the view that “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance” raised by Dr Bola Dauda, participants debunked the pedestrian view that tuition is not paid in public universities. In a way, this argument further justified the seemingly exorbitant rate charged by private-owned universities, considering that the government spends an average of about 750,000 naira on each student in these public institutions annually. This is even at a time when the education sector only accounts for a mere five to six per cent of the country’s annual budget. The South African case is even peculiar in the face of the relics of its apartheid past, in which the Black population are still struggling to access higher education. Similarly, other countries accessed in the program still operate within their colonial past, as the system continues to produce students for colonial social needs and demands that are obsolete and in need of a serious rejig.

From this perspective, the convener and other participants proposed the possible future of higher education in Africa. Citing the instance of Nigerian hip-hop artists like Davido and how the entertainment industry is globally representing and exporting Nigeria, he noted his view on the promotion of outside class/curriculum talent among students in these institutions. Other areas brought to the fore in this matrix include fashion, coding, and information technology. Attention to this area is even more essential when considering the weak synergy between the state’s economy in Africa and the education system, which has led to the ongoing production of unemployed and underemployed graduates. However, due to lack of adequate time, the compelling point raised by Professor Olukoya Ogen on ICT in the United States, including coding and new models, which has the potential of spreading to various countries in Africa, was not adequately expressed.

Nevertheless, since the future of humanity lies in data and information technology, this is one of the areas to explore to bridge the gap between the town and the gown in Africa. It appears that such a model is already springing up in places like Ghana with the Ghana Communication Technology University and informally in various locations in Nigeria. Undoubtedly, harnessing global best practices into their operations would go a long way in securing Africa, if not for the present century, then the next. In this regard, the First Technical University, Ibadan, is currently epitomising the public-private partnership model. In his presentation, the Vice-Chancellor of the university, Professor Ayobami Salami, educated the audience about the possibility of having different private interests in a university, with each group or individual investing in the faculty and research areas that interest them within the governing rules of the institution. If properly designed to avoid conflicting interests and the usual politicking in the current university system, this is a promising model that speaks to the business approach many of the participants emphasised.

As the conference progressed into the second day, more of these rigorous ideas and in-depth debates continued with panel discussions about the reformation of the public university’s system after the convener declared the program open . Leading the discussion, Dr Hannah Muzee shared the dynamic experience of an academic from Uganda and South Africa, where she articulated the limitations in the system, challenges of reform and models of surmounting these gaps through public-private partnerships, for instance, and what she described as academic capitalism. During the panels, speakers synthesised their discussions around professionalism in the academic culture and community for optimum performance. This included the establishment of higher institutions of learning, the structure of management and administration of these institutions, recruitment process, community service, ethnicisation of the university system, archaic pedagogical methods of teaching and research, unionism and management engagement, assessment of lecturers by students, the democratisation of the management process, the media and the dissemination of information about innovative developments in the intellectual community, particularly in the higher institution of learning, and other issues too broad to list out but are intertwined largely within the preceding frames.

Continuing the conversation, Professor Sifawa from Sokoto State University lamented what he described as the civil service mentality in the education system. This position illuminated the recruitment process and system within the academic community, and other issues related to the remuneration of (academic) staff, the higher institutions of learning as causes rather than value centres (in the words of Professor Francis Egbokhare), the relationship between the town and the gown, and many more, delving deeper into the entire academic culture of teaching, administration, and research. The community seldom attracts the best brains to impact quality into the general fabric of society. Following this cancerous paradigm, participants recommended that the culture of mentorship be revived, and students with such capacity should be encouraged to join the community. This is even more so in the face of the wide-range shortage of staff in many of the public universities, which is made worse by ageing, lack of diversity in staffing (especially in the areas of gender and ethnicity), the exploding ratio of lecturers to students, and other related issues that put pressure on the existing capacity of departments and faculties for viable knowledge production.

Still within this understanding for reformation is the equal remuneration model, which has been argued not to encourage or reward productivity by adopting a blanket model. This was brought to light on the first day of the conference by Professor of Political Science and International Relations, Olufemi Mimiko, and became reflective in other discussions on the second day, with effect on the emerging thought in the academic community on the extent of the paradigm shift required in the system for it to function to benefit the society in tandem with global best practices. According to the argument, the current system promotes academic laziness in the community, impacting negatively teaching methods and the recurring devastating state of town-gown relations. Professor Ya’u, for instance, followed this logic up when he highlighted the inability of these institutions to deliver programs and innovative panacea to the peculiar problems of their constituencies, which starts from their host community to the state and the region.

Academics seldom see their responsibility as a call to duty and service for the public good and genuine reinvention of the society, but rather as a source of livelihood, just as in other professions. However, various participants bemoaned this culture as they counselled on reformation. Taking this further, Professor Oluyemisi Obilade, among other participants, argued that specialised institutions should refocus their priorities to manifest the particular purpose they have been established as “specialised institutions.” This sparked a debate on why these institutions exist in the first place. For instance, why do we need specialised institutions of higher learning focusing on technological development and innovations, agricultural productions and scientific discoveries, medical innovations, oil and gas development, education and teachers’ training, and many more, when these could be factored into the existing general structure of the universities, as in faculties and colleges? The answer to this lies in the ability of these institutions to regulate their activities in line with their peculiar frame of objectives and service to the community without interference in an encouraging space that encourages research and teaching in these fields. However, this argument is limited by the current state of regulation of these entities, as well as the fact that despite the presence of agricultural institutes, colleges, and institutions in the country supposedly serving as the botanical and experimental farms of the state, many agricultural consumables still come from outside of its shores.

Among other things, it was concluded that for a specialised institution, a specialised regulatory body is required with adequate funding for research and teaching. Emphasising the above, Professor Obilade insisted that there must be returns on investments in the specialised institutions. This simply means that the staff of the institutions have to be productive and responsive to their immediate environment and the global market of knowledge and innovation. Also, the government and management of the institutions must provide incentives for this paradigm shift that impede them from the “civil service” mentality that often binds them to (administrative) distractions. Certainly, investors have a role in restoring these institutions to their proper place in society. During the session on this subject, it was made known that investors could partner with institutions to produce innovative ideas that will provide marketable solutions to the myriads of challenges in the country. Notably, some of the solutions have been imported from foreign countries, putting existential strain on the country’s economy. It is not hard to see how this relates to the First Technical University model and the business-oriented approach to the above education system.

Going by the administrative structure of these higher institutions of learning encoded in the various acts establishing them, these approaches have always been the establishing rule. When followed to the latter, items (m) and (n) in Section 3 of the 1978 University of Nigeria Decree allow university authorities to manage the institution’s resources, including prudent investment of the resources for viable returns to its coffers. The tone sets the motion for the administrators to access loans, implying partnership with investors for the exploration and execution of innovative ideas. In contrast to this expectation, and probably given the social condition of the Nigerian state in which the academic environment operates, such partnership has only largely been explored in building more physical structures that continue to reproduce the deficiencies of the state. As the participants observed, there is an urgent need for concerted efforts towards staff training and retraining, quality teaching and research output, flexible curriculum, recruitment of staff, admission of students, social relationship within the community, and the relationship among the communities. This goes into the relationship between the private and public universities, specialised institutions and universities, relationship with the media, engagement with donors and other stakeholders in the state’s educational sector.

Professor Olaopa referred to all of these as development approaches to teaching and research. The erudite technocrat and professor of Public Administration, and other participants, particularly during the session on Unionism in Public Universities: Impacts and Changes, deepened this intervention further into the discourse of unionism and the wider relationship within different (governing) organs in the system. While some participants argued that university administration is left to academics, giving them academic autonomy/independence with the possibility that even the pro-chancellor belongs to this community, it was further observed that the current relationship between the vice-chancellors, who are often appointed from a pool of seasoned academics, and the unions within the community has not been good because they seemingly belong to the same cult.

The issues surrounding this are complex and yet multi-layered. Some aspects mentioned by participants at the conference included the political process that often dominates the process of appointing vice-chancellors and the over-militarisation of the union bodies. In its response, ASUU reiterated its position that the alleged militarist posture of the union has only resulted as the last option when all other channels of diplomatic approach had been exhausted in years of fruitless negotiation with the authorities. On this, Professor Ogunyemi called for a situation where the government reverts to the union in the face of difficulties in reaching an agreement to avert the recurrence of strike action that does not benefit anyone. Professor Mimiko, who had a passionate encounter with the body during his tenure as the Vice-Chancellor of Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, and whose articulated view of the system was animated in the account of his stewardship in that position published by Pan-African University Press, counselled that union bodies in public universities should avoid reaching agreements that are not feasible with the government. ASUU was also advised on the discipline of its erring members and to take into cognisance their welfare in its operations.

On a grander level, discussions at the two-day events focused on the need to reinvent higher institutions of learning in Africa towards deeper integration into the evolving global community of practice, state, and industry. The stimulating event was brought to a close by the convener, who highlighted significant features of the conference after discussing the experiences and views of students. There is no doubt that all participants at the conference were enriched in one way or the other as discussions were opened up for long-term consideration and execution at various levels.

A huge congratulation to the Carnegie Foundation, University of Texas, at Austin, Babcock University, the convener, and participants from five African countries on the success of this regional gathering on the reinvention of the educational system in Africa.

Falola is a Nigerian historian and professor of African Studies. He is currently the Jacob and Frances Sanger Mossiker Chair in the Humanities at the University of Texas at Austin.

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

Opinion

Omajuwa Igho Natufe’s Path To Redemption In Okpe Nation (2)

Published

1 day ago

September 12, 2024

NewTimes

Prof. Tony Afejuku

By Tony Afejuku

The column continues our reading of Professor Omajuwa Igho Natufe’s very sparkling essay on the path to redemption in Okpe nation. The President General worldwide of Okpe Union is a thorough-bred Safarian and a cosmopolitan who advocates justice and equal rights for all Nigeria’s indigenous ethnic nationalities including his beloved Okpe nation. He denounces, without mincing words, the Animal Farm mentality and hierarchy in Nigeria. Kindly savour what he says/proposes as Nigeria’s “homogenous and heterogeneous federating units”, and other matters of patriotic and national/nationalistic interest.

A Pathway to Redemption

Nigeria’s minority ethnic nationalities are crushed under the weight of the above problems. This is evident in the onslaught of minority ethnic nationalities in central Nigeria, for example, and the arrogant inclusion of southern minority ethnic nationalities in the Biafran and Oduduwa Republic maps produced by the Igbo and Yoruba, respectively.

Prior to independence in 1960, the demand for state creation for Nigeria’s ethnic minority nationalities was meant to restructure the polity by freeing them from the marginalization which they faced in each of the three regions dominated by the tripodal hegemony. This issue was the key theme at a post-Richards national constitutional conference convened in Ibadan in January 1950 under Governor John MacPherson. To help focus the deliberations at the Ibadan Conference, H. M. Foot, the Chief Secretary posed two vital questions for the consideration of the delegates. “Do we wish to see a fully centralized system with all legislative and executive power mainly concentrated at the centre or do we wish to develop a federal system under which each different region of the country would exercise a measure of internal autonomy?”

“If we favour a federal system, should we retain the existing regions with some modifications of existing regional boundaries or should we form regions on some new basis such as the many linguistic groups which exist in Nigeria?” (As cited in Kalu Ezera, Constitutional Developments in Nigeria, London, 1961, p.110.)

The second part of the question regarding the creation of regions (states) for the various ethnic groups recognized that the Nigerian polity had become a prison for minority ethnic nationalities.

Unfortunately, only the Midwest Region was created via a referendum on August 9, 1963 under a civilian regime.

Basically, to restructure a political system is to reform its components and redefine the relationships governing the powers and responsibilities of all levels of government. Especially in a supposedly federal system like Nigeria, such a restructuring is expected to recognize the exclusive jurisdictions of the federating units in critical sectors of industry and the economy as evidenced in the 1963 Constitution. The resistance to this has been very loud, as the opposition perceives restructuring as a code name for the dissolution of Nigeria. In fact, those arguing for 54 or more states in Nigeria and opposed to restructuring are primarily concerned about forfeiting their fiscal benefits of the current distorted federal system that allows them to collect monthly stipends from Abuja.

The politico-military class in power since 1966 has jettisoned the federal principles of the 1963 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in favour of a unitary political system, even though they christened the 1999 constitution a federal republican constitution. Ironically, the United Kingdom, a unitary system possesses more federalism compliant institutions than a supposedly Federal Republic of Nigeria. For example, political parties in the United Kingdom are federalism compliant unlike the military imposed command system that defines the form and content of Nigerian political parties. This military imposed command system has permeated all levels of governance including the state and local governments.

While it may be fashionable to condemn the military regimes for restructuring Nigeria via their respective state creation exercises between 1967 and 1996, it is most disturbing that the elected civilian governments (1979-1983; and since 1999) have failed to address the issue in a meaningful way to halt the various centrifugal forces in the country. For example, their refusal to restore the 1963 Republican Constitution and jettison the 1999 Constitution, which is essentially a militarized command-system constitution, can only be construed as a rejection of renewed federalism.

But if restructuring is to succeed in Nigeria, there must be a universal recognition of the tenets of federalism as contained in the 1963 Constitution. Assuming that we agree on the prerequisites for restructuring, then a key question to be resolved is on the number of states (federating units) in a renewed Nigerian federalism. Given that Nigeria is a collection of indigenous ethnic nationalities, it is the view of the Okpe Union that a restructured Nigerian federalism must reflect this imperative. The state creation imposed on the country by various military dictatorships (1967, 1976, 1987, 1991, and 1996) merely balkanized the three major ethnic groups into states. Thus, by military fiat, the Hausa/Fulani have 10 states, the Yoruba have 7, and the Igbo have 5. This military fiat must be discarded. If we recognize that all indigenous ethnic nationalities are equal federating units of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, then on what basis was these three ethnic groups balkanized into several states, respectively, and thereby establishing power disequilibrium in the polity? This creates an undue access to power for these ethnic nationalities in terms of multiple federal ministerial and board appointments to each of them, compared to, for instance, 1 federal ministerial appointment for the entire 40 ethnic nationalities in Plateau State or 1 for the entire 10 ethnic nationalities in Delta State. Is this George Orwell’s Animal Farm hierarchy the basis for Nigeria’s renewed federalism?

As a framework for a restructured federal Nigeria, we propose the following: – The creation of homogeneous federating states for the 15 most populous ethnic nationalities that have contiguous boundaries, respectively. These federating units will be 15 homogeneous ethnic-based states for the Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo, Ijaw, Itsekiri, Kanuri, Ibibio, Okpe, Tiv, etc.
The creation of a maximum of 15 heterogeneous (multi-ethnic) federating states for the other ethnic nationalities. An ethnic nationality occupying a defined contiguous boundary in a heterogeneous state shall constitute an autonomous region with due constitutional jurisdictions. It shall also have concurrent jurisdiction with the heterogeneous state over natural resources discovered in its territory; but shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over primary and secondary education, culture, language, and traditional institutions, etc.

A Charter of Rights and Freedoms protecting minority rights will anchor this restructured federalism.

If the proposed homogeneous and heterogeneous federating units are rejected in favour of the existing 36 states, then it is recommended that a distinct ethnic nationality occupying a defined contiguous territory, like, in alphabetical order, the Benin, Itsekiri, Nupe, and Okpe, for example, be classified as an autonomous region with due constitutional jurisdictions to exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the state over natural resources in its territory; but shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over primary and secondary education, culture, language, and traditional institutions.

Another proposition which appeals to Okpe is the 18-regional structure prescribed in the PRONACO People’s Constitution of August 2006, where the Isoko, Okpe, and Urhobo ethnic nationalities are grouped in one region to be known as either ISOKPU or ISOKPEHOBO Region. Each of the three (3) ethnic nationalities shall be classified as an autonomous area with due constitutional jurisdictions to exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the state over natural resources in its territory; but shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over primary and secondary education, culture, language, and traditional institutions.

In all of the above proposed frameworks, the revenue allocation formula shall be 50% derivation; 20% Federal Government; and 30% to the Federation Distributable Pool.

It must be emphasized that restructuring by itself does not guarantee an end to marginalization in Nigeria. In each local government area and in each state across Nigeria, there are communities marginalized out of the mainstream by leaders and political parties comprised of members of the same ethnic and religious groups, for example, in Delta State and in Okpe Nation. What we have is poor governance across all levels of government, including the traditional system, anchored on massive corruption. Therefore, we recognize that restructuring by itself is never a panacea for good governance, as long as corruption remains the mainstay of Nigerian political culture. A respected retired permanent secretary who knows his onions had this to say about corruption. He opined:

“One fact Nigerians must know is that Nigeria is not a rich country per capita; it is the corruption level that projects otherwise. That is why we must learn to live within our means and fight the war against corruption a little more ruthlessly”. (Anonymous, May 4, 2024)

In his series of public lectures, Prof. PLO Lumumba succinctly addressed this quagmire by reminding us that those found guilty of corruption in China are summarily executed while their counterparts in Africa, especially in Nigeria, are eulogized and elected to leadership positions at all levels of government. We recommend the Chinese treatment in dealing with convicted corrupt officials in Nigeria as the most effective method of waging the war against corruption. We are aware that sitting legislators (at local, state, and federal levels) will not support this recommendation. It is left for the citizenry to determine for how long they want to watch their commonwealth stolen by political and traditional so-called leaders.

To be continued.

Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.

Opinion

The Thabo Mbeki Letters (Part 12): The Price Of Peace And The Cost Of Conflict

Published

3 days ago

September 11, 2024

NewTimes

Prof. Toyin Falola

By Toyin Falola

Peace is an essential commodity, second only to oxygen, as it is a necessity for every individual. Regardless of the excellent condition of human biological components, the absence of peace can lead to tragic problems that undermine all they have accomplished. Peace is central to collective human development. Ironically, despite people’s awareness of the cardinal values of peace and their advancement, the rate at which conflicts at cross-country and international levels are perpetrated illustrates humans’ capacity for self-destruction. While it is undeniable that some groups of people derive satisfaction from inflicting violence on others, particularly the vulnerable, it is strange that certain groups deliberately incentivize conflicts due to their tempting rewards. This highlights the complexity of human nature and the intricate relationships they maintain among themselves.

Thabo Mbeki, as a leader of a vibrant black country, South Africa, has emphasized the importance of peaceful coexistence among humanity and the extent to which he, and others alike, have committed both human and economic resources to achieving peace and mitigating conflicts, especially in war-torn societies across the world. Seeking peace is to advocate for tolerance, which is crucial for ascertaining a sound ecology for trade and cultural exchange.

Prof.Toyin Falola (left) and Thabo Mbeki

The ongoing conflict between Palestine and Israel has not only strained the relationship between the two countries but has also increased the inflammatory potential in the region, making it difficult, if not impossible, to foster economic growth and technological advancement. As a leader of the free world, Mbeki understands that unchecked violence poses risks to the safety of others. When conflicts are allowed to persist without resolution, the ripple effects are inevitable. For instance, while the prevalence of violence in the Middle East may not have direct or immediate and measurable consequences on South Africa, a deeper analysis reveals that it would bring a litany of horrendous challenges to the people.

Africa’s proximity to the Middle East exposes it to the secondary danger of being a potential ground for mass migration of people seeking safety from conflicts in their countries. Meanwhile, the problem of having a significant exodus of people into a continent already striving for economic stability could ignite a new wave of crises that may not necessarily occur on the war fronts. In essence, foresighted leaders like Mbeki must confront such challenges proactively to safeguard their interests, as neglecting preventive actions could jeopardize long-term stability.

Prof. Toyin Falola (left) and Thabo Mbeki

The promotion of peaceful coexistence as a foundation for a prosperous future is not born from weakness; rather, it reflects having an excellent disposition to the future. Mbeki often emphasizes that South Africa’s approach to governance is deeply rooted in historical understanding, particularly of the centuries-long exploitation at the hands of the former colonial powers, with England playing a central role. Nevertheless, these African leaders chose to sweep the materials of history behind them and embrace dialogue–not out of a desire to play the game of vendetta but from a genuine commitment to build a prosperous future.

Mbeki believes that once there is a demonstration of commitment from the Europeans, they can forge alliances with them, provided this commitment is backed by deliberate efforts to move beyond the precarious issues of the past. Therefore, it is understandable when Mbeki emphasizes the importance of investing in any activity that would foster peace between them and other nations to enable progressive engagements. A peaceful environment is essential for all forms of development, including economic and technological advancements critical to modern transformation.

On the home front, it is undeniable that South Africa, under the leadership of these emancipators, is making tremendous strides to dispel any wrong notions that may have been generated against them. They are taking bold and calculated steps to pave a harmonious path toward the continent’s success. In essence, for South Africans to convince outsiders about their intentions to make great choices and stand by them, it is important to first make a courageous impact from the home front. If they struggle to gain the trust of other Southern African countries about their desires to lead the path to economic rediscovery, it would be nearly impossible to rally broader support for their political and economic rejuvenation campaign. Against this backdrop, they were making significant investments to integrate South Africa with other countries within the region to lay solid foundations for sustainable development.

Mbeki’s efforts exemplify the efforts of a foresighted leader. This is evident in how he was embraced and treated with respect and honour during his visits to different African countries. He established himself as a key advocate for economic prosperity and political freedom in the region. This has significantly increased his popularity among his peers across these nations. It is important to state that Mbeki’s bold statements and actions have been carefully evaluated by other countries, which have observed his confident leadership and his ability to bring people together to attain a common goal.

Regional cooperation is crucial for promoting inclusivity and fairness for everyone, irrespective of their political leanings. The fact of history is that South Africa and other countries in the region have experienced cultural and ideological interchange, influenced by common linguistic heritage and long-standing moral values. Colonialism and apartheid should not be the basis for an abusive relationship that entertains different voices. Contrary to the pessimistic assumption that Africa is polarized by factors such as ideological philosophy, moral principles, and cultural identities, the reality remains that the continent’s long history of coexistence has blurred these lines and boundaries.

Therefore, it is crucial for African nations to immediately address divisive schematics pulled by minority groups to tinker with the peace they have been enjoying in the region. To prevent potential crises, they must actively engage in activities that foster togetherness and allow them to enjoy the inherent benefits of working together. The importance of unity in Africa is underscored by the intrinsic strength that comes from collaborating to achieve a common purpose.

In essence, the success of many countries in the world today comes from their coordinated efforts and cooperation in achieving their objectives. This way, trans-country conflicts would be faced with unified rejection to demonstrate to outsiders the seriousness of African leaders in combating altercations that deter investors. Sustainable integration among African countries would not only help eliminate terrorism on the continent but also foster a reinvigorated system and create the foundation for progressive engagements.

This is why Mbeki has become an agent of peace, crusading for the outright erasure of dangerous engagements that could hinder the attainment of peace on the continent. His outstanding efforts and remarkable achievements in promoting unity and understanding among Africans cannot be overlooked. In his power, he has made it possible for Africans to recognize their true potential. He points out that Africans were not brought up to hate and despise others, and unless the frustration becomes unbearable, they have always been welcoming and accommodating.

The price for peace, as paid by this precious human, is the concerted efforts made through his visits to different African countries, urging them to avoid violence and shun conflicts at all costs. Mbeki understands that allowing conflicts to persist impedes progress and makes it challenging to achieve the people’s desirable goals.

PS: This is the concluding contribution to a 12-part series based on the collections edited by Sifiso Mxolisi Ndlovu, titled ANC Today Letters: The Ideas and Thoughts of President Thabo Mbeki, Volume 1, 2001-2004, supplemented by materials from the Thabo Mbeki Museum, UNISA, Pretoria. The series was composed over five weeks in three different countries. The museum’s resources, digitized under 27 categories, can generate over 200 books.

Opinion

The Thabo Mbeki Letters (Part 11): Africa In Global Politics

Published

4 days ago

September 10, 2024

NewTimes

Prof. Toyin Falola

By Toyin Falola

The foundation of strong nations is built on mutual integrity and collaboration among regional powers to enhance solid responses to common problems. Challenges are an integral part of the inevitable experiences that people must face and overcome to achieve their collective aspirations and reach new and greater heights. Importantly, challenges can wreck an individual or a group, depending on their resolve to confront the issues confidently or otherwise. In other words, problems do not automatically turn a people or the country into a golden star; often, the disposition of society or the individual facing these issues will determine the outcomes.

Africa’s problems are deeply rooted in the despicable politics of exploitation and predatory feasting orchestrated by the colonizers, and its legacy lingers because of the strategies adopted by the colonial powers. They deliberately created divisions within the continent through the policy of divide and conquer. In response to these challenges, African nations needed to organize resistance to stop the perpetuation of colonial servitude. This became the foundation for the standard front and voices that marked Africa’s independent protests. From East to West, North to South, the cry for autonomy reached the pinnacle and cut the fiercest minds of the despots, creating the necessary atmosphere to resist oppression. Without such a united front, Africa may have continued to face a significant pushover by their former colonial imperialists who were irrevocably committed to the exploitation of African human and natural resources.

Thabo Mbeki

To address these challenges, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) was established in the early 1960s to address the people’s concerns from a united front. The OAU aimed to tackle issues comprehensively rather than piecemeal, ensuring that the issues affecting them would be addressed for the good of the entire continent. However, it could not achieve these lofty dreams, although it was set for active continental politics.

Thabo Mbeki mentions how African solidarity extended to countries actively supporting liberation struggles. One such example is Cuba, which shared the ambition and agitations of African independence, not just in words but in actual practice. Mbeki recounts the contributions of Cuba under the leadership of Fidel Castro, recalling the courageous steps the country took to ensure that the South African people were liberated from the ceaseless intimidations of the oppressive apartheid state. Cuba invested in South Africa’s emancipation by providing human resources to combat the aggressors, demonstrating a deep commitment to the country’s freedom.

Without such bold steps, the activities of these countries would have been destabilized by the oppressors. Despite its limited economic resources, Cuba committed itself to the cause of African freedom and made available the necessary materials required to battle the overbearing West. This demonstrates why it is essential not only to create mutual bonds with one another in Africa but also to consider countries that share similar interests outside of it. Cuba’s identification with Africa redefined unity and solidarity. This relationship significantly impacted the ties between South Africa and Cuba and between Cuba and other African nations.

Intercontinental collaboration and team building are undeniably important. Still, the need for internal coordination among African countries is even more critical, given their shared history of the brutalization of their culture, person, and heritages. To confront the perpetrators of generational oppression, African nations needed to develop a united front. This speaks to the reality that many individual countries will continue to be victims of similar problems if they refuse to come together and assert themselves at the continental level. The fact that former colonizers remain invested in the subjugation of Africa reveals why the continent’s future could be under extended challenges unless decisive actions are taken. This recognition led to the creation of mechanisms to secure a brighter future for Africa.

It was necessary, and even desirable, for people with similar ambitions to become well-coordinated, allowing them to confront their fears and assert themselves where required. Unity within Africa was non-negotiable and crucial in realizing its fullest potential. While nations could possess power individually, they would have continued to face severe challenges if they did not pursue their goals from a united front. Therefore, their strength consolidated better when they came together to speak as one, as exemplified in the structured and systematized ideas that emerged when they became the African Union (AU).

The organization of these countries into a shared group was not intended to achieve ceramic intentions where people would only come together for the sake of it and not necessarily to enhance measurable changes. As Mbeki emphasizes, the cardinal key to the togetherness of different African countries is to combat internal challenges that have ravaged them in recent years. For example, the problem of underdevelopment has become endemic in Africa to the extent that access to essential opportunities is almost unattainable for the average individual. This chronic underdevelopment has created a challenging atmosphere for survival, contributing more to the destabilization of the continent.

More importantly, African nations must be on the same page in matters of governance and the character of leadership. If some countries disregard the people’s will and install leaders through undemocratic means, it will create a complex problem that will be difficult to manage, as it not only sets a lousy precedent but also encourages dangerous behavior from leaders. Also, the lack of strong institutions in Africa will lead to a rapid decline in the quality of life of individuals and groups, further deepening the continent’s woes.

For instance, African leaders needed to take decisive steps in their engagements to tackle unemployment and combat the misappropriation of public resources. This explains their resolve to organize themselves and thoroughly examine the issues facing them as a continent. Equally important is the need to strengthen their position by understanding powerful countries. It is an amusing irony that after having been oppressed and held down by these nations, African leaders would now seek political collaboration with them. They needed solid knowledge of these former oppressors to avoid sabotage that could send them back into decades of stagnation and backwardness.

This pragmatic approach must be recognized as a necessary sacrifice that African leaders embrace with equanimity, knowing that it could bring sustainable progress if they could only take the required steps. Through those efforts, it is apparent that they would have enough opportunities to establish intercontinental networks to save them from the problems they had hitherto experienced. Mbeki notes that African leaders needed to strategically position themselves to take advantage of global politics, especially in ways that promote their interests and safeguard their future aspirations.

PS: This is a 12-part series based on the collections edited by Sifiso Mxolisi Ndlovu, titled ANC Today Letters: The Ideas and Thoughts of President Thabo Mbeki, Volume 1, 2001-2004, supplemented by materials in the Thabo Mbeki Museum, UNISA, Pretoria. The series is composed over five weeks in three different countries. The museum’s resources, digitized under 27 categories, can generate over 200 books.